Skip to content
Link copied to clipboard

Mike Missanelli: Who wins on Jackson deal?

Somewhere between three months ago and now, when DeSean Jackson looked to be the guy for which the Philadelphia Eagles wouldn't hold open an elevator door, the Birds welcomed their incorrigible wide receiver back within their good graces.

The Eagles signed DeSean Jackson to a five-year, $51 million deal. (Alejandro A. Alvarez/Staff Photographer)
The Eagles signed DeSean Jackson to a five-year, $51 million deal. (Alejandro A. Alvarez/Staff Photographer)Read more

Somewhere between three months ago and now, when DeSean Jackson looked to be the guy for which the Philadelphia Eagles wouldn't hold open an elevator door, the Birds welcomed their incorrigible wide receiver back within their good graces.

Late Wednesday afternoon, the Eagles signed Jackson to a long-term contract. It's $51 million for five years, which is Santonio Holmes money after all.

You remember all that fuss last year. Jackson and his agent Drew Rosenhaus kept insisting that DeSean was worth the same kind of cheese the Jets gave Holmes, somewhere in the neighborhood of $10 million a season. The Eagles sure didn't think so, or else they would have given him the money.

 When the Eagles would talk about Jackson, you'd keep hearing about his negatives : Jackson was injury prone; he had prior concussions; he wasn't really a No. 1 receiver. And by the time the season had been sorted out, Jackson went so bratty on them - he showed up late for a team meeting, he didn't appear to bust his routes on Monday Night Football, he stormed out of at least one Eagles practice late in the season - the Birds' front office was giving everyone the impression that they were just going to cast Jackson adrift, and without getting value back.

So what happened to promote such recent peace and harmony?

"Well, I wish I had the answer," Jackson told me. "You'd have to ask the Eagles. I'm just excited about the opportunity of being able to go out there and keep putting it on the line for my teammates and this city."

The good angel in me is appearing over my right shoulder, telling me that the Eagles were pure in conscience with this deal, that they are going for a Super Bowl championship in 2012 and they want all their players happy. The good angel says that the Birds learned their lesson last year when they tried to squeeze the last remaining drops of juice from DeSean Jackson on a bargain-basement, outdated contract that saw the fleet wide receiver suffer on a mere $600,000 salary. Of course, that blew up in their face and they are now leaving nothing to chance. They just weren't going to take the risk that Jackson, one of the few game-breaking players in the game, would sulk again on a one-year deal - albeit one that paid him $9.5 million as a franchise player - without long-term security.

The bad angel over my left shoulder is telling me the Eagles signed Jackson because it was simply a good bargain and they had him in a compromising position.

The deal DeSean Jackson signed this week is under market value. It calls for Jackson to make $10 million up front, like right now, and a little less than another million in salary when the season starts. The total guaranteed money is about $18 million - two seasons worth - with an injury clause that could limit the Birds commitment to just $15 million.

Consider that Vincent Jackson just signed with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers for $26 million guaranteed and Pierre Garcon, who doesn't have a sniff of Jackson's talent, signed for $21.5 million guaranteed. Marques Colston is getting $20 million guaranteed. Stevie Johnson is getting $19.5 guaranteed. Even Holmes, who's now on the backside of his career and can't even be in the same huddle as his own quarterback, is grabbing $24 million guaranteed from the Jets.

If you're a businessman, you've got to love the way the Eagles do their business.

It is possible that Jackson, making such a paltry sum, desired quick cash rather than continuing to tax Rosenhaus' credit cards, and that facilitated a deal." (Now, Drew may get that back, or he could be like the bookie in the movie Casino who had to pay on Joe Pesce's winning bets but got stiffed when Pesce lost.) The Eagles waved up-front money under DeSean's nose. Without the up-front, Jackson would have had to wade through the rest of March, and then April, May, June, July and August without getting his first check from the franchise-tag contract.

In signing Jackson to a five-year deal, which in reality is no better than a two-year deal, the Eagles have kept their risk very low. The Birds can waive him in the third year of this contract and it will only cost them an additional $250,000. That means his trade value remains excellent. And that up-front $10 million? That's prorated over the life of the five-year contract, which means Jackson's salary cap hit is also reasonable.

Interestingly enough, the Eagles have made at least a two-year commitment to Jackson in the face of only one year of commitment to Michael Vick. The Birds can cut Vick after this season rather than being committed to picking up the rest of his monster $100 million deal. To that end, they have provided the next quarterback, whomever that may be, a solid wide receiver corps led by Jackson. So might the Eagles pull the trigger on drafting a quarterback, say in the second round, perhaps Boise State's Kellen Moore?

Of course, whether Jackson made a bad deal is of no concern to Eagles fans. They've got DeSean Jackson back in their starting lineup, happy, and hopefully, back making dynamic plays.

"A lot of people could have said, why did you settle when you could have gotten this or that?" Jackson told me. "I just feel really comfortable with the situation here in Philly."

Oh yeah, you've got to love the way the Eagles do business.

Parting Shot. With only Temple making this year's NCAA tournament, is it time to examine the current health of Philadelphia college basketball? With all due respect to St. Bonaventure, how do the Bonnies, tucked away in Godforsaken Olean, N.Y., forge a better season than either St. Joseph's or La Salle? Don't get me started on Villanova. And I like Bruiser Flint, but when the Drexel coach starts making excuses for his poor strength of schedule by saying it's a "disservice" to make his kids play tough teams on the road, he's a bit misguided. When you play in the CAA, it's imperative that you make the effort to play good teams on the road. Even if you lose those games, your strength of schedule might get you into the NCAA tournament. Evidently, VCU and George Mason making the Final Four isn't enough to pull you into the tourney by proxy.